DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3 8B
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
DeepSeek-R1 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 8B is cheaper.
Scores updated · 23 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software30DeepSeek-R13 of 3 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20DeepSeek-R12 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10DeepSeek-R11 of 3 tests · 2 ties
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10DeepSeek-R11 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10DeepSeek-R11 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each · 1 tie
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3 8B costs 85% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where DeepSeek-R1 pulls ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+16.9points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+16.9points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+11.9points ahead
Where Qwen3 8B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 23 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingDeepSeek-R1
- Terminal-Bench 2.1DeepSeek-R1 by 16.919.12.2+16.9
- SciCodeDeepSeek-R1 by 10.438.327.9+10.4
- Terminal-Bench HardDeepSeek-R1 by 3.86.12.3+3.8
AgentsDeepSeek-R1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingDeepSeek-R1 by 1.76.44.7+1.7
- GDPValtie00tie
- Terminal-Bench 4.0tie00tie
ReasoningDeepSeek-R1
- GPQA DiamondDeepSeek-R1 by 11.970.858.9+11.9
- Humanity's Last ExamDeepSeek-R1 by 4.68.53.9+4.6
- CritPttie0.60tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-R1 by 16.930.513.6+16.9
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterQwen3 8B by 6.511.34.8+6.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationtie9.79.3tie
Following instructionsDeepSeek-R1
- IFBenchDeepSeek-R1 by 5.53933.5+5.5
Other results9 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceDeepSeek-R1 by 32.5-32.2-64.7+32.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3 8B by 16.411.427.8+16.4
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexDeepSeek-R1 by 15.624.69+15.6
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthDeepSeek-R1 by 9.993.583.6+9.9
- vectara_factual_consistencyQwen3 8B by 6.588.795.2+6.5
- AA IntelligenceDeepSeek-R1 by 4.111.47.3+4.1
- AIME 2024DeepSeek-R1 by 3.879.876+3.8
- vectara_answer_rateQwen3 8B by 2.99799.9+2.9
- AIME 2025DeepSeek-R1 by 2.77067.3+2.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-R1 or Qwen3 8B?
DeepSeek-R1 wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 8B wins none, but costs 85% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
DeepSeek-R1. It wins 3 of the 3 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 8B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-R1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 8B costs $0.18 and $0.70. That makes Qwen3 8B about 85% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 23 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 14 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.